I don't think they are getting the credit they deserve. They are 6-0 and can only play those on their schedule. Is it easy, yes, but no easier than the Broncos schedule to this point. It is easier going forward though. I don't see more than 3 losses on their schedule and it could be less (possibly 4). At Den, Indy, at SD. I don't see them losing at home to SD as SD's Defense is really bad. I can also see them betting us at KC as they always play us well at home, it is cold weather loud stadium and teams are going to open up the playbook every time against the broncos.

Also, lets not forget that Indy and SD in SD are the last two games of the year so by that point it might not matter much.

Except that is simply relying on a comparison that hasn't happened, you're just assuming that their defense will collapse. There isn't anything to draw this conclusion other than simply want to dismiss the success as as a fluke because it happened to the Broncos, so that must mean it will happen again to KC.
Nevermind there are people looking at the play of their Defensive line, linebackers, and secondary, and the results show that each level of the defense is excellent- as in there's less argument to say they are weak and have yet to be tested and exposed in some areas of the defense- be it run or pass.
In adjusted analysis to take into account the teams they've played versus other top defenses over the last 20 years, so it's been handicapped for any defense facing a weak team to give a truer performance rating, they have a top 5 defense in the last 20 years of comparison- right now coming in just ahead of the 2002 Bucs defense.

It's easier to have an off day on offense, like Denver did this past sunday. We still put up 35, and most weeks that will beat any team. If Kansas City's premier unit has an off day, the Chiefs lose. That is a ton of pressure to place on a defense.

I also tend to think KC is being overlooked because of the Broncos. Offense is sexy to the general public. Defense is only sexy to football nerds.

Why is it easier to have an off day on offense? Wouldn't scoring 35 indicate that's not really an off day of much significance- more like a hiccup, since it's just around 1 possession for a a score off the median by the offense.

It's sort of circular logic and yet lacking in data to state as a fact that offense or defense can more easily overcome an off day, then continue to a weak point of data to make some sort of concrete definitive statement. You simply can't draw a conclusion based upon a singular event.

Schaub is the better quarterback, and has more experience, but he's a mental train wreck right now, and his confidence is shot- which has led to his indecisive play and mental errors. It's a 50/50 toss up - he probably gives his team the best chance to win, but you can't be excited to send him out there against a KC defense just licking their chops for him throwing more interceptions, and another possible pick-6

See, based on his current workload, this is a fair statement. The continued use of him at such a high level is simply a given that it will take its toll. That doesn't mean it will happen this season, but law of probability ticks up as it does for anyone playing. Unfortunately, there is nothing to dictate if or when this happens, and just like flipping a coin, every player on every play has a 50/50 chance of being injured. The more the player plays, you are simply flipping that coin of chance more often.

Except that is simply relying on a comparison that hasn't happened, you're just assuming that their defense will collapse.

I don't know about collapse, but I think most expect KC to give up 20+ against very good to great offenses.

People will cite the 2000 Ravens, but even they didn't face too many elite QB's. Their road to the playoffs consisted of beating Gus Frerotte, Steve McNair, Rich Gannon and Kerry Collins. None were really elite QB's, like a Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Brees are. Was just one of those rare seasons where there weren't many elite QB's

I don't know about collapse, but I think most expect KC to give up 20+ against very good to great offenses.

People will cite the 2000 Ravens, but even they didn't face too many elite QB's. Their road to the playoffs consisted of beating Gus Frerotte, Steve McNair, Rich Gannon and Kerry Collins. None were really elite QB's, like a Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Brees are. Was just one of those rare seasons where there weren't many elite QB's

True, you can only face the teams that are on the schedule. The Baltimore comparison can be tabled until or if they're still doing as well at the end of the season, but it's been mentioned before. In terms of strength of schedule, KC has had a tougher sos than Baltimore- by the smallest margin, around .2 or so that it's nominal and really only relevant for those that want to say KC has performed against a weak schedule- maybe valid but no worse than other top defenses have in the past and they are simply doing what is expected from an elite unit. The Eagles and Dallas are top end offenses, and they didn't gash KC or even score 20 pts. Denver at home may be the one game you look at the schedule and say they probably give up over 20 points.

Unfortunately, there is nothing to dictate if or when this happens, and just like flipping a coin, every player on every play has a 50/50 chance of being injured. The more the player plays, you are simply flipping that coin of chance more often.

I think you need some lessons in probability. If there was a 50% chance every player would get hurt on every play, no team would make it through a game.

True, you can only face the teams that are on the schedule. The Baltimore comparison can be tabled until or if they're still doing as well at the end of the season, but it's been mentioned before. In terms of strength of schedule, KC has had a tougher sos than Baltimore- by the smallest margin, around .2 or so that it's nominal and really only relevant for those that want to say KC has performed against a weak schedule- maybe valid but no worse than other top defenses have in the past and they are simply doing what is expected from an elite unit. The Eagles and Dallas are top end offenses, and they didn't gash KC or even score 20 pts. Denver at home may be the one game you look at the schedule and say they probably give up over 20 points.

I will add with Baltimore, that they had a HOF tight end in Shannon Sharpe. And an eventual 2000 yard rusher in Jamaal Lewis. Pretty sure their offensive line was significantly better then KC's this season, as well. So a significantly better offense imo, which is really Jamaal Charles and not much else.

KC did a good job against Dallas, but Romo came in the game with bruised ribs. Have to give credit to KC, but it isn't like they have went up against a lot of top tier QB's. Eagles had a lot of self inflicted wounds against KC, but really gashed them on the ground game. I think Denver gave up 4 more points to Philly, and most agree that the Broncos do not have a top passing defense right now

I started my account the last time the chiefs were any good, then they sucked for a long time. So I didn't bother to comment. Now that they have had a few good games against weak competition, I'M BACK BABY!

Its funny for past several years only bobo and kcpud were resident queef fans. Fear Lanier was around for a bit. Now KC fans are popping up like dandelions.

False sense of bravado.

But hey, it's been a long time since they've been able to. It'll make for good times for us. Much like 97 when they had a soft offense and a very good defense, went to the playoffs and lost in the division week against a team with a very good offense and a decent defense. They had the same bravado that year too....and I had a nice long laugh in the end.

But hey, it's been a long time since they've been able to. It'll make for good times for us. Much like 97 when they had a soft offense and a very good defense, went to the playoffs and lost in the division week against a team with a very good offense and a decent defense. They had the same bravado that year too....and I had a nice long laugh in the end.